![]() ![]() Supreme Court denied the incumbent air carriers' petition for a writ of certiorari. The legal controversy was not resolved until December of 1970, when the U.S. The airline's application to the TAC was bitterly contested and the original TAC decision to permit Defendant to begin serving Dallas, Houston and San Antonio was litigated for over four *294 years through a succession of state and federal courts. Southwest's proposed entry as an intrastate commuter carrier sparked a hostile reaction from the incumbent air carriers serving the Texas market. Southwest was incorporated in March of 1967 and filed its initial application with the Texas Aeronautics Commission ("TAC") in November of 1967 to serve the intrastate markets of Dallas, Houston and San Antonio. It presently serves major cities in Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana and New Mexico. Southwest's inaugural flight was June 18, 1971. ![]() ![]() The facts are undisputed.ĭefendant Southwest Airlines is a scheduled air carrier engaged in the transportation of passengers. As the application of § 703(e) depends, in large part, upon an analysis of the employer's "particular" business, it is necessary to set forth the factual background of this controversy as a predicate to consideration of Southwest's BFOQ defense. Since it has been admitted that Southwest discriminates on the basis of sex, the only issue to decide is whether Southwest has proved that being female is a BFOQ reasonably necessary to the normal operation of its particular business. ![]() Southwest reasons it may discriminate against males because its attractive female flight attendants and ticket agents personify the airline's sexy image and fulfill its public promise to take passengers skyward with "love." Defendant claims maintenance of its females-only hiring policy is crucial to the airline's continued financial success. The BFOQ window through which Southwest attempts to fly permits sex discrimination in situations where the employer can prove that sex is a "bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise." Id. § 703(e), justifies its hiring only females for the public contact positions of flight attendant and ticket agent. Southwest contends, however, that the BFOQ exception to Title VII's ban on sex discrimination, 42 U.S.C. The airline also conceded that its height-weight restrictions would have an adverse impact upon male applicants, if actually applied. Īt the phase one trial on liability, Southwest conceded that its refusal to hire males was intentional. The class further alleges that Southwest's published height-weight requirement for flight attendants operates to exclude from eligibility a greater proportion of male than female applicants. Plaintiff Gregory Wilson and the class of over 100 male job applicants he represents have challenged Southwest's open refusal to hire males as a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. This case presents the important question whether femininity, or more accurately female sex appeal, is a bona fide occupational qualification ("BFOQ") for the jobs of flight attendant and ticket agent with Southwest Airlines. Padgett, San Antonio, Tex., Akin, Gump, Hauer & Feld, John L. *293 Manitzas, Harris & Padgett, Inc., Shelton E. Molberg, Dallas, Tex., for plaintiff and intervenor. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |